On Wed, 17 Jun 2015 08:53:55 -0400 Tim Beelen <tim@diffalt.com> wrote:
So, you have no knowledge of all the details of the CIA's actions, but you are sure that they consist of violations? Is that right?
Of course. Government is a criminal organization, by definition. That's all you need to know about it.
By the way, the CIA is under congressional oversight. That is where accountability ends. They don't have to explain themselves to you.
How effective is this oversight? I think the vast majority Members of Congress in general do not have the cognitive skills to understand the issues that the CIA creates. Let alone come to an agreement on how to handle the agency.
To summarize the problem: the CIA is has about 20.000 employees. Which is substantially bigger then in the 1950s where they had maybe about 4-5.000. They are an intelligence office. They started out gathering intelligence, gained intelligence gathering capabilities and now have capabilities to operate independently to some extent for some years.
Now, we know they spy on Congress. Manipulate congress. Overthrow governments. Steer elections. But who controls them? With no oversight they basically do 'whatever' and 'whatever' is quite a dangerous thing to do. Now, in hindsight, I don't care if they go around the world and bully people into playing nice. But that is besides the point.
The problem is the culture. Recent breaches of security contractors have shown that information technology information gatherers (ITIG) employs a lot of clowns. Like you, you want a polarized version of the world where the CIA is bad. Just bad. And by your own admission you don't even care what they do, you are just looking to punish them. That is not a data driven assessment, it's just operating on assumptions. Which is what the U.S. Government's foreign policies are based on. Which is why I know that either a. the CIA does not hold it's information gathering capabilities to a professional standard, or b, they listen to clowns.
And this brings us back to the CIA who is SUPPOSED TO JUST FUCKING BE MIDDLE MANAGEMENT. Instead they gave middle management a gun and told them to go fix things in the world. Middle management has always been decorated five U.S. flags, with sprinkles with red white and blue and enough U.S. jingoism to fill a stadium. I.e. it created the CIA.
Now I assume, as a Congressional committee, that every time you ask the CIA for a report on a foreign issue they do a little sing and dance and ask for more money to go solve it. Because the following things are *always* valid: a. They can claim they have limited capabilities to get men on the ground. and b. With the right people and equipment and amount of cash Congress does not have to send in the military if things get really nasty if they solve it for them.
Other then that I don't think people working for the CIA are that different from the majority in that they polarize the world to preserve their sanity: They want every Arab to be bad. And actively want to know everything about them, just to make them look bad. They know that ever Congress Member or committee might not vote in their best interest, so everyone needs to be manipulated.
And if I had a track record of overthrowing governments, fixing elections and operating with impunity overseas because foreign governments *allow* them. I'd be feeling pretty awesome about myself too. All the while they are operating under the grace of congress.
This is not the only institute that grew out of control in the United States.
And the fact that I don't sleep well is that even if I printed this piece of text on a piece of paper and went around congress and tacked it on each of their foreheads it would not change anything. It is just that to be make a person aware of a problem does not give them the skills or knowledge to deal with it.
And really, all congress has to do is take the gun away from middle management. This ofc is a bad analogy. I believe everyone should be able to carry a gun if they please.
Are you suggesting CIA, NSA, FBI, etc ought do what they will, except ath someone is able to say that what they've been doing is not in U.S. best interest? That sounds inane.
I am not even in U.S. nor a U.S. citizen - to me your statement sounds highly problematic and indicative and problematic nationalist think. Yes. I like my country. I has lots of nice people. Yes we need a balance of powers in the world - we need national strength and unity, but this applies to all countries, not just to the U.S.! Considering what you said about the problems with nationalistic think in your last paragraph I take this as an admission you're well versed in doublethink. Collections of power, as happens with govt, attract more power abusers than benevolent dictators, unfortunately. For this reason, a one world government would be doomed from the outset. We need a strong Russia, a strong America, and strong small countries etc. I don't need a stronk Russia. Russian culture is not conducive to how I'd like people to run things. Emphasis on people. Not the government. It's the only hope for any long term semblance of balance. If the world we a single U.S.A.W. entity, Snowden could never have happened. Of course Snowden required a courageous individual too, but it would have required someone willing to actually give up the rest of their life if there were no possbility of sanction anywhere in the world. The Ed event would still have happened. It is just the retarded notion that to be make a person aware of somehow gives them the insight to deal with it. You might reconsider your push to have someone other than yourself somehow prove that the CIA's actions over the decades have not been in U.S. best interests, or that this is a relevant question! I frankly don't care. I just don't want them to have the ability to muck things up. Because it kinda proves they have issues. I don't mind them doing good for the wrong reasons. It's doing bad for the right reasons.
The CIA has very well funded issues. VERY WELL FUNDED... VERY WELL... VERY... WELL... funded? And if they don't get the funds directly they start running dope and sell guns.
So, CIA's issues are a domestic issue. So I'm pointing my finger at Congress. And since this is a democracy I'm kinda limited to the rule of the majority.